3 ms·
It seems likely to me that this case would be referenced in the upcoming San Bernardino decision, but I am not a lawyer. Does anyone know? Does this prop up t
by studentrob 11y ago
It seems likely to me that this case would be referenced in the upcoming San Bernardino decision, but I am not a lawyer.
Does anyone know? Does this prop up the chances of that judge ruling in favor of Apple?
Could the DOJ try to bring the Brooklyn case in front of the supreme court? What are the next steps we're likely to see?
- uxp 11y agoGenerally, current litigation doesn't reference other current litigation (mostly because current litigation has not established enough of a "fact" to be referenced), but you can read this statement and see that Orenstein allowed Apple to submit a brief while this case seemed to be going stale in-between the guilty plea of the defendant and his sentencing, precisely because it was being held up in 9 other cases of the "government" (whether that be the FBI in the San Bernardino case, or the DEA in this case, to the plain Chicago PD in another) leveraging the AWA to compel Apple to open this and other phones by some means. I'm also not a lawyer, but I can see how this helps Apple in fighting the AWA used to compel them to unlock or decrypt phones seized as evidence in part of some crime where Apple was not alleged as a perpetrator or coconspirator of the crime.